| # | User | Rating |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Benq | 3857 |
| 2 | jiangly | 3810 |
| 3 | maroonrk | 3534 |
| 4 | tourist | 3528 |
| 5 | Kevin114514 | 3510 |
| 6 | turmax | 3411 |
| 7 | Um_nik | 3387 |
| 8 | Radewoosh | 3367 |
| 9 | heuristica | 3322 |
| 10 | strapple | 3317 |
| # | User | Contrib. |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Qingyu | 158 |
| 2 | maspy | 150 |
| 3 | Um_nik | 146 |
| 4 | Errichto | 139 |
| 5 | adamant | 136 |
| 6 | maroonrk | 134 |
| 7 | DNR | 133 |
| 8 | Dominater069 | 131 |
| 9 | Proof_by_QED | 130 |
| 10 | BledDest | 129 |
|
0
practice on real contests more, do virtual rounds at least once a week |
|
+1
sure, why not |
|
0
very useful, thanks! |
|
+7
Don't know whether it's mentioned in the video, but I love the idea that the structure of Fenwick tree is basically the segment tree with every right segment removed. |
|
0
I'd go for |
|
0
Alternative proof for problem C that there's no such $$$x = k_1 - k_2$$$, that Let's write down numbers $$$0, n, 2n, \ldots \pmod m$$$. They all have a remainder 0 modulo $$$n$$$. We need to find such $$$k \cdot n \equiv 1 \pmod m$$$. Here, we can apply $$$\gcd$$$ rule, which says that if we have numbers $$$a$$$ and $$$b$$$, $$$a \bmod b$$$ is divisible by $$$\gcd(a, b)$$$. (If you wish I can prove it too). But since $$$\gcd(n, m) = 2$$$, all numbers $$$0, n, 2n, \ldots \pmod m$$$ are divisible by 2, so there's no $$$1$$$ in that series. Thus, no such $$$x$$$ exist. |
|
0
Thank you so much for such a good tool! I'll definitely use it! |
|
0
Thank you so much! |
|
+10
Thanks for fast editorial and beatiful contest. Problem D was amazing! It actually blew my mind. |
|
On
MikeMirzayanov →
In Problems Statements, Examples Are Now Highlighted if Test Cases Are Used, 11 months ago
0
Thanks!!! |
| Name |
|---|


